Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!columbia!rutgers!nike!ucbcad!zen!zooey.Berkeley.EDU!c160-aw
From: c160-aw@zooey.Berkeley.EDU (Christian Wiedmann)
Newsgroups: net.micro.mac
Subject: Re: VI features, Editors, etc...
Message-ID: <431@zen.BERKELEY.EDU>
Date: Thu, 2-Oct-86 19:02:13 EDT
Article-I.D.: zen.431
Posted: Thu Oct  2 19:02:13 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 4-Oct-86 06:49:03 EDT
References: <8610022020.AA28814@cory.Berkeley.EDU>
Sender: news@zen.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: c160-aw@zooey.Berkeley.EDU.UUCP (Christian Wiedmann)
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 49

In article <8610022020.AA28814@cory.Berkeley.EDU> dillon@CORY.BERKELEY.EDU (Matt Dillon) writes:
>(Don't give me any hash about cursor positioning... that's only a very small
>part of the big picture).
>
>Mouse-based 'user friendly' editors are all an well, but completely useless
>once you get experienced.  At the outset, the 'user friendly' mouse-based
>editor is easier to learn, but you get to a point where you simply cannot
>go any further (you know everything there is to know, you are typing/
>moving the mouse as fast as you can), and when you get to this point, the 
>VI user has the advantage because HIS limits are quite a bit higher than
>yours, and thus he can get things done faster.

I disagree when you say that a mouse based editor has a lower limit. When I'm
typing a paper, no matter what text processor I'm using, I don't use cursor
movement controls. It's when I'm editing that I need to move around a lot.
There is no way you can convince me that it is easier or faster to edit a
bunch of text in vi than with a mouse based editor. A keyboard based editor
is only faster when you have to mix movement and text entering.

>
>Not only that, but user-friendly editors have virtually NO programmability.
>Programmability implies things that you cannot do with a menu-driven editor.
>True Programmability allows the experienced user to do almost anything he
>wants.  The ultimate in programmability is EMACS. ...

Ah! Here's the real key issue. The configurability is where most of the gain
in speed can come from. But why can't a mouse or menu driven editor have these
features? MEDIT for the Mac has some pretty sophisticated macro programmability
and implements these in a menu.

>
>Lately, we have seen combination editors on the market... which have
>Menu and Mouse, but still base the editor on the keyboard.  These types
>of editors are getting more popular as they are both easy to learn, and
>have extremely high limits once you do get experienced.  I think that is
>where the generic 'EDITOR' will go in the future.  Apple's "idiot box"
>idea just isn't making it en` ToTo.
>
>					-Matt

The "idiot box" may not make it for you, but for many people who aren't
friendly with computers, it is indispensable. Try to take even MacWrite away
from somebody who doesn't like to mess with the details of using a computer.
Don't believe that the whole world has the same aptitude for computers as you
do! Apple's "idiot box" may just do more for the home computer market than any
other innovation previously. (ok, so it's a romanticization, but it has some
elements of truth).

		-Christian